Self-driving cars may have to be programmed to kill you

[waves]

"The self-driving cars that could soon dominate our roads, perhaps even making human-driven ones illegal some day, could end up being programmed to kill you if it means saving a larger number of lives"...


Self-driving cars may have to be programmed to kill you

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...ve-to-be-programmed-to-kill-you-10326472.html

 

[Rick Otto]

Society is programmed to kill for "it's greatest good".

I'm not so sure this is a real problem:

'There is a runaway trolley barrelling down the railway tracks. Ahead, on the tracks, there are five people tied up and unable to move. The trolley is headed straight for them. You are standing some distance off in the train yard, next to a lever. If you pull this lever, the trolley will switch to a different set of tracks. However, you notice that there is one person on the side track. You have two options: 1. Do nothing, and the trolley kills the five people on the main track or 2. Pull the lever, diverting the trolley onto the side track where it will kill one person. Which is the correct choice?'

The reason I doubt it would happen is because the third option (slow to a stop), which is the cars probable first default response, isn't considered.

Plus, the computing power to make such a decision in a split second... no car could afford that.

The greater threat is that your car will get hacked, and run you into a wall.

 

[Vylo]

Society is programmed to kill for "it's greatest good".

I'm not so sure this is a real problem:

'There is a runaway trolley barrelling down the railway tracks. Ahead, on the tracks, there are five people tied up and unable to move. The trolley is headed straight for them. You are standing some distance off in the train yard, next to a lever. If you pull this lever, the trolley will switch to a different set of tracks. However, you notice that there is one person on the side track. You have two options: 1. Do nothing, and the trolley kills the five people on the main track or 2. Pull the lever, diverting the trolley onto the side track where it will kill one person. Which is the correct choice?'

The reason I doubt it would happen is because the third option (slow to a stop), which is the cars probable first default response, isn't considered.

Plus, the computing power to make such a decision in a split second... no car could afford that.

The greater threat is that your car will get hacked, and run you into a wall.

The hacking problem has already become an issue. Quite a few cars have been hacked, though not maliciously yet. People were able to remotely control the car.

 

[Rick Otto]

The hacking problem has already become an issue. Quite a few cars have been hacked, though not maliciously yet. People were able to remotely control the car.

A journalist got killed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/michael-hastings-car-hacked_n_3492339.html

 

[Vylo]

A journalist got killed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/michael-hastings-car-hacked_n_3492339.html

Oh wow, hadn't heard about this one, thanks for the link. It is considered a conspiracy theory at the moment though, interesting.

 

[Fantine]

I can't imagine that a human sitting in the driver's seat couldn't override the self-drive feature at any juncture where it seemed to be malfunctioning.

And I can't imagine ever feeling comfortable enough to be 'asleep at the wheel' in a self-drive car.

 

[Rick Otto]

Oh wow, hadn't heard about this one, thanks for the link. It is considered a conspiracy theory at the moment though, interesting.

You said "conspiracy theory" like it reflexively means "not true"...
or am I just being paranoid?
lol.

 

[Vylo]

You said "conspiracy theory" like it reflexively means "not true"...
or am I just being paranoid?
lol.

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean we aren't out to get you.

 

[brinny]

It's both scary and tragic that Michael Hastings died in such a horror of a way, and that investigations, as we understand them now, are not adequate.

 

[Goonie]

You said "conspiracy theory" like it reflexively means "not true"...
or am I just being paranoid?
lol.

Interesting article but at the moment it would go under conspiracy theory. Since it is a theory of what might have happened, no evidence presented that it did happen. The article appears to be pure speculation.

 

[Supreme]

Should I even bother learning to drive, with the future looking to be driverless? I have to say, I love the look of that car in the article. I wouldn't want one that might kill me, however.

 

[Rick Otto]

Interesting article but at the moment it would go under conspiracy theory. Since it is a theory of what might have happened, no evidence presented that it did happen. The article appears to be pure speculation.

Point taken... but isn't this the Conspiracy Theory Forum?
Speculation is what theory basically means.
So my context for using the word "true" doesn't mean "it's what happened", it means the speculation is indeed, "pure" - meaning free of irrational presumption.
Small change.

 

[Goonie]

The worry with self driving cars is that the blue screen of death, might be literal.

 

[Rick Otto]

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean we aren't out to get you.

I know ALL about you guys.
You want to eat my brains!
=80

 

[Goonie]

Point taken... but isn't this the Conspiracy Theory Forum?
Speculation is what theory basically means.
So my context for using the word "true" doesn't mean "it's what happened", it means the speculation is indeed, "pure" - meaning free of irrational presumption.
Small change.

This is the news forum, but it is not irrational to think that it might have happened, but at the moment an accident is the most likely explanation until new evidence emerges.

 

[brinny]

Should I even bother learning to drive, with the future looking to be driverless? I have to say, I love the look of that car in the article. I wouldn't want one that might kill me, however.

same here....

 

[brinny]

I know ALL about you guys.
You want to eat my brains!
=80

LOL!

 

[JacquelineDeane]

A journalist got killed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/michael-hastings-car-hacked_n_3492339.html

My concern is stopping the idiotic people who are using cars to kill the innocent because they are murderers and for their evildoing they must be stopped. Murder is morally/ethically wrong. Even God said "Thou shalt not kill" in the Old Testament. And killing someone who is innocent is even worse.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

If self-driving cars were advanced enough to make that sort of decision, why wouldn't they be advanced enough to avoid the disaster altogether?

 

[Goatee]

Load of rubbish and scare mongerring